Sorry, this is common sense and common courtesy.

If you are linking to a GOG game like 7K: AA and you want to help other people by saving them the time of switching focus and searching the GOG game search bar for that game then that is fine.

If you are linking to an external site, for example, a place where 7k is available for free, but not at GOG, then it is kinder to post the link in full and let people judge for themselves (or search for themselves) whether it is a site worth visiting.

https://7kfans.com/

Youtube is an external site and anti-privacy so applies doubly so - don't hide their urls

The top post here ignores how truly bad it was around 2010 +/-, before GOG was around [with much] and indies, IF you could find them, were few and far between. Steam had truly consolidated its grip by then. "Physical copies" didn't disclose themselves as "Steam key in a box" so you'd constantly have to be returning things...

Sims3 was one of the few games one could get around then.

Problem w/ Achievements is this: they are put server-side. They don't need to do this, but...this is how they track what you do (in-game telemetry) for what they should improve, fix, etc for future patches and/or future games. If gamers ain't finishing main quests by a good percentage - well, they need to make the main stuff better or make the game's main quest shorter so players can finish it; have easier difficulties/settings so player can finish the game; and/or things of that sort. Same thing if say players ain't doing evil choices - they might in a future game eliminate them b/c....what's the point of them there, if gamers ain't doing them? Maybe they'll often-up in the future different good choice or neutral choices, in the sequel. Or, if nobody's doing side-quests - well, maybe they'll eliminate them or put less of them in the game...UbiSoft, I'm looking at you here on this one. :oP

Realistically: Achievements should be build into the game w/ offline profiles for the player, not tied to online-nonsense: think what Divinity 2 DKS/DC do and also what Hard Reset Redux does. Some players like to Achievement Hunt and don't buy tons of games - so yeah, they should be able to have Achievements in game, even if say one day Steam, GOG Galaxy, and/or any other servers go away for this non-sense; hence why I say these should be built into the game for OFFLINE support...again, like Hard Reset Redux on Divinity 2 DC/DKS do allow for.

Now, when you go online: it should be optional if you want to upload this data (on your own) or you can set it to automatically upload when you're online. This stuff should be done in the settings.

As for DRM: yeah, I don't care for it, of course. But, there are lots of games I want to play, which have it on Steam, Ubi, EA, Epic, whatever, etc. I ain't gonna live forever, as our human-body's won't last forever - so if you got a DRM'd title, play ASAP before it ends up dead like Tabula Rasa, Darkspore, and/or The Crew. And, oh yeah - support companies you love that offer-up DRM-FREE versions that are out there on GOG, Epic, whatever.

If you're gonna use Steam, Epic, etc - next section's for you.

ALWAYS check which games have DRM and Don't for Steam, Epic, etc. And make sure the game supports local offline saving too. Check around on the PC Gaming Wiki and look a title-up. You'd be surprised to find out which titles might actually don't have it - like say FF12 on Steam, Gone Home on Steam, Vampyr on Epic, Batman Arkham games on Epic, etc etc. Though, be careful - some games, their DLC's are DRM'd, but not the base-game; think say Outer Worlds on Epic.

Yeah, you still might need to use Client-App to download it - but, you might be good, after you do the download and just execute game from the main EXE file from the folder (or a shortcut you create) without Steam going in the background. So, again; always check PC Gaming wiki for info and support those games. And back-up those folders when it's DRM-FREE somewhere else, just in case an update adds DRM-junk, client-app required junk, etc etc.

By that logic all games are manipulating and constraining gamers.

They clearly said "The way they are implemented"

How does that logic extend to all games manipulating and constraining gamers? I appreciate a lot of games that deliberately don't manipulate their users, including games that have achievements.

Let me ask you this: for how many PC games that have Steam achievements can the achievements be viewed from a menu 'in the game' (i.e. that is built into the game)? If these achievements are indeed 'part of the game', then they should be somehow accessible and viewable from 'in the game', right?

In the vast majority of cases, it's not done like that. The achievements are not viewable or tracked in-game, they are totally separate. They only exist in the context of Steam and are only viewable through the Steam client. That shows that they are not 'part of the game' at all - they are simply a marketing gimmick, tacked on as an afterthought by the developers (because gamers have come to expect them).

I can't give you a count. As I said earlier though Trails to Azure and Trails from Zero are 2 examples that do this. (I think because these were originally for handhelds which did not have a reliable platform for implementing achivements). But many games today can take advantage of a platform which already implements the UI to display achievements in a unified way and this saves them from extra coding. It's not really a benefit for every game to be unique in how they handle this and reinvent the same basic UI over and over when the platform has already solved that task.

They are part of the game because the detection and activation of an achievement is CODED INTO THE GAME.
Every game design is different. Some games use achievements for in game rewards like Halo 3 gave armor pieces. Guid Wars 2 (and I think FF14) gave items, XP, mounts. Games like Devil Survivor can give NG+ benefits from achievements.
Super Smash Bros games and Kirby Air Ride have achievement checklists for prizes. Yakuza 0 used achievements for items from a clown. Noita unlocks spells. Into the Breach achievements let you unlock new mech squads. Lego Star Wars Unlocks characters, ships, mini-ships. Baldurs Gate 3 gives you golden dice in-game if you complete an Honor Mode run.
etc, etc.

And some games don't do anything. Every game is different.

Wrong. They are in the game and are often exposed to multiple platforms such as Steam, XBOX LIVE, PSN, GOG, etc. It's not exclusive to Steam.

That very same argument could be equally applied to almost any of countless other aspects of gaming.

One could just as easily say that things like doing in-game sidequests, or getting a fast completion time (in speed-based games), or getting a high score (in score-based games), or fulfilling the requirements of in-game checklists, or even just completing a game's main story, is equally as pointless as is the act of earning Achievements.

But some people have fun earning Achievements, just like the fun that they & others have from other aspects of playing the games.

Who's to say that "non-Achievement fun" is 'right & good' and "Achievement fun" is 'wrong & bad'...?

Having said that, I do agree that some Achievements are needlessly repetitive & grindy, just for the sake of being repetitive & grindy, and those particular Achievements are indeed unhealthy. But that doesn't mean that the concept of Achievements itself is bad; it just means that some Achievements are poorly-designed & implemented.

I agree. I'm surprised this is not obvious to all.

Yeah you're trolling. Congratulations.

https://www.gog.com/forum/general/list_with_gog_games_that_have_ingame_achievements_v2

Ok. Well, for that minority of games that handles achievements internally, I would consider those achievements part of the game.

I think this is probably the crux of the disagreement - i.e. how we define 'a video game achievement'. Yes, these games contain code relating to client-based achievements. But, all that code is doing is sending a signal via an API to an external service when an event has occurred. I don't consider that event signal to be 'the achievement'. In my view, 'the achievement' is a state that is being tracked and displayed to the player. If that state is being tracked and displayed by an external client, then I wouldn't consider the achievement to be 'part of the game'. The machinery to send an event signal via an API is a part of the game's code, but the tracked achievement itself isn't.

You're free to take a different view on it, in terms of how you define 'an achievement'. However, for me, the bar for whether I consider an achievement to be part of the game is that the game itself is tracking that achievement state and communicating it to the player.

If you truly believe as such, then there's really no point for you in playing video games.

Story-based sidequests - you're experiencing content that enhances the experience of the main storyline game. Maybe there's more character development/progression with one of your side characters, maybe it adds more storytelling to the subtext of the game's message, maybe it deepens the world's lore, maybe it adds a higher difficulty gameplay, or maybe there are hints from the devs that there'll be another sequel. This isn't equivalent to a small popup window saying you got an achievement.

Speedrunning - your name is on record and you're acknowledged by the speedrunning community. If you're really good, you might be showcased in a documentary by Youtubers like Summoning Salt or Abyssoft. You can cheat achievements with Cheat Engine or what-have-you, but you can't cheat a speedrun because others will check and do the math that your runs are legitimate. This isn't equivalent to a small popup window saying you got an achievement either. Sure, some people can have their fun with achievements in a healthy manner. And some devpubs actually know how to make good achievements that can enhance the player experience. I don't have a problem with in-game achievements and those who enjoy achievements and can politely ask the devpubs for them.

However, it's in the way it's been implemented in modern times that is problematic. Instead of them being in-game, they are now tied to server-side clients as MysterD said. It encourages people susceptible to achievement obsession to use clients. I've discussed before how Steam has in its documentation how they urge devpubs to create achievements through Steamworks as a way to "enhance the value of legitimate copies" and have cited Heartbound by Pirate Software that tied their client achievements with their save system so that the game is effectively DRM'd. So ultimately, it is one of many vehicles that Steam and pro-DRM devpubs use to build user dependency on clients, and slowly enact their DRM creep.

As for GOG specifically, AB2012 has commented multiple times on why it's been a negative externality for offline installer users. Achievements being tied to clients means devpubs have to jump through more hoops to distribute here, Galaxy's Steam Wrapper Beta is in an abysmal state that slows game launch times by 3-6x because they're searching for Galaxy to be open. It's bad for prospective devpubs, it's bad for offline installer users - the implementation is just too much of a hassle for something that is entirely optional and is ephemeral. Because we all know that if/when any platform dies, their achievements will die with them even if you were to screenshot it beforehand. And that touches on why most of us are on GOG in the first place - the offline installers are what will last forever, not the client that achievements are tied to. We shouldn't be putting the cart before the horse.

And finally there are achievement extremists such as yourself, who demand achievements and slander legitimately good games simply because they lack them. It dissuades devpubs who do read the release threads from releasing more of their titles here and further sets the DRM-free movement further back into the stone ages. We've already seen this with Axiom Verge devs who felt pressured release achievements with their GOG port and ultimately decided not to. It worsens the store for the rest of us and that is something me and others here are not OK with.

If you can consider being less inflammatory with your demands and asking more nicely like most reasonable people, you'd have a lot more sympathy for your cause.

There are multiple timelines?

Just in the OP's theory of time.